CBM-170 classic or SE with T-amp?

[BD902]

I was wondering if anyone here has had any experience running either or both of these speakers with a T-amp, and what the results were.

The SE's extra bass is attractive but it seems to have maybe 2db lower sensitivity than the Classics, which might be an issue with a 10wpc T-amp. It's for a bedroom and moderate (70-80db tops) volume, so am not needing earthshaking volume, but would like to have enough headroom for distortion-free peaks.

Am trying to decide between used Classics and used SEs.

Also, does anyone know the difference between "anechoic sensitivity" and "in-room sensitivity?" The sensitivity specs that most manufacturers post, are those those usually anechoic or in-room? Just to get a fair comparison...

thanks,
BD

[Droht]

Anyone have any thoughts on this? Anyone using t-amp with 170s, 340s or even Sierras? Does that seem like a bad idea?

[Quinn]

I played with a T-amp on the 340s which are more efficient. I worked fine but you better not want more than moderate volume.

[BD902]

Anyone have any thoughts on this? Anyone using t-amp with 170s, 340s or even Sierras? Does that seem like a bad idea?

I'm very happy with my T-Amp (Trends Audio not Sonic Impact) powering my 170SEs, the sound I'm getting is beautifully smooth and detailed without any fatigue. And a surprising amount of bass, nice and tight, will not be getting a sub as originally planned. Volume is also pretty decent, easily gets up to about 80db without distortion.

My guess is, with the Sierras you would probably be best served by a pair of T-amps in bridged mode.

[Quinn]

My t-amp experience was with the Sonic Impact,